




^ : ^c/ 







^-jrfoyu> 







.^v 



Iw^'-'^F 




p*f, 



!^i 



'^1%, 






^ivi^l^ 







Tf 



^*?J^ . >^ 



li •> 



^r<^i 



:w,i .) ' 



,J 






* ^a 




« 



r. 


.^7-/.// 


''P43'Bi- 


I 


UNITED 


STATES OF A-MERICA. 

•i, t, -A ■<. ;• > ^' t,-* 


1 


iOKf 




:^^Ami 



••«. q; 









A A .'?. S A 







'm^M^m^ 






\^^ : Af 









:fj^,:p 



i^mri^ 







^^^, /y'^^^ 



■^ V "t ^ ' - 



<»; ^ 7> 



AaP '^ 






WJW 




fAD 



ra^irv^ 



,'«miii 




5r$e QtUimn of (JITonflteflational 0:!jtitctfs. 



CENTENNIAL ADDRESS 



A PLEA IN VINDICATION OF THE RIGHTS 



FIRST CHURCH OF CHRIST IN PEPPERELL, MASS. 



DELIVERED FEB. 9, 1847. 



By CHARLES BABBIDGE, 

MINISTER OP THE FIRST PARISH. 






"""^o^Wasn^rv^ 



/d BOSTON: 

WM. CROSBY AND H.P.NICHOLS, 
111 Washington Street. 

1847. 






CAMBEIDGEt 
METCALF AND COMPANY, 

PRINTERS TO THE UNIVERSITY. 



To Rev. Charles Babbidge, Minister of the First Church and Parish in 

Pepperell, Mass. 

Dear Sir : — The undersigned, a Comnnittee of said Parish, respectfully request 
that you will favor them with a copy of the address delivered by you on the 9th 
instant, at a celebration of the centennial anniversary of tiie founding of said 
church, for publication. 

J. BuLLARD, George W. Tarbell, 

John Walton, G. Robinson, 

Luther Tarbell, Jr., Ivers R. Harvey, 
Ebenezer Richardson, Henry C. Winn, 
C. W. Bellows, A. H. Wood, 

Thomas Stevens, Lemuel W. Blake. 

rcppercll, Feb. 9tli, 1847. 



Pepperell, May 24th, 1847. 

To Messrs. Bullard and others, Committee of the First Parish. 

Brethren : — Your letter, requesting a copy of my address for publication, has 
been in my hands several weeks. I have refrained from acceding to your request, 
because I felt unwilling to protract unnecessarily any agitation among us. For 
obvious reasons I now submit the address to your disposal, with the sincere hope 
and prayer that the rising generation among us will never permit a human and 
ever-changing creed to stand between them and God's Holy Word, since to do so 
is virtually a rejection of both God and his Son. 

Respectfully, yours, 

Charles Babbidge. 



NOTE. 

This Address is printed, first, because such was the request 
of the Parish, and, secondly, because so many things have 
been erroneously imputed to the author as having been ut- 
tered by him, that he is somewhat desirous that those who 
did not hear may read and judge for themselves. The Ad- 
dress is printed precisely as it was written. It was written 
under the sense of an unprovoked indignity, and may seem 
ill-natured and severe. That cannot be helped now. It 
makes no literary pretensions, having been prepared in the 
short interval between the two centennials, and in connec- 
tion with other labors besides those usually required of that 
"servant of all work," a country minister. 



ADDRESS. 



To commemorate the deeds and the experiences of our 
ancestors is, at the same time, a duty and a pleasure. That 
duty becomes more imperative, and that pleasure is greatly 
enhanced, when religion and patriotism combine to prompt 
and to gladden a public celebration. It is equally in the 
name of religion and of patriotism that we have, this day, 
met to commemorate the founding of the First Church of 
Christ in Pepperell. 

Under ordinary circumstances, this would have been a 
most interesting occasion. It would have afforded a noble 
opportunity to review the prominent events in the history 
of the town, and also to revive the recollections of the men 
of former times, to read again the story of their eventful 
lives, and to search out the secret springs from which they 
drew that wonderful strength of character which has made 
them the boast of this, and will make them the wonder of 
coming generations. It would have been an easy and a 
comparatively pleasant task, in this way to have illustrated, 
while we celebrated, New England Congregationalism. 

But, alas ! from this religious and patriotic observance, 
this act of filial reverence, we are almost wholly cut off. 
Strange as it may seem, though the First Church of Christ 
in Pepperell does not complete the hundredth year of its 



6 

existence till this very day, there has nevertheless been 
already a centennial celebration of this event, some eleven 
days ago. A somewhat numerous, and, I presume, very 
respectable body, styling itself " The Church of Christ in 
Pepperell," did, at the time above specified, proceed, first, 
by means of evidence which they esteemed satisfactory, 
to establish their own right to be called The Church of 
Christ in Pepperell,* and, upon the strength of that as- 
sumption, did, secondly, in the afternoon of the same day, 
proceed to celebrate the occasion by a public discourse and 
other formalities. 

Against this assumption, and this whole procedure, so far 
as it is a public act, I now enter my public and solemn 
protest. I shall sustain this protest by such facts as I deem 
pertinent to the case, and by an appeal to the good sense 
and the sense of propriety which I hope still remain in the 
hearts of my fellow-citizens. In a word, I shall appeal to 
what remains among us of the spirit of New England 
Congregationalism, in behalf of Congregationalism itself. 

But, first, a word must be said concerning the apparent 
anomaly of two separate centennial celebrations of the same 
event. The First Church in Pepperell was gathered on the 
29th of January, 1747 ; but still it had not reached the 
completion of its hundredth year till the 9th day of Feb- 
ruary, 1847. And lest we should seem to have used a 
Unitarian calendar in our reckoning, as we are sometimes 
suspected of using a Unitarian Bible, I will explain the 
matter. 

In consequence of the solar year, that is, the period of the 
earth's revolution around the sun, not coinciding with either 
365 or 366 days (the solar year requiring 365 days and a 
fraction of another day), some confusion existed in the an- 
cient methods of computing time. Julius Csesar made the 
first attempt at reforming the calendar, and his method 
of reckoning is called Old Style. But as this method 

* See Note B. 



made the year a little too long, Pope Gregory XIII. di- 
rected ten days to be struck out of the year 1582, calling 
the next day after the 4th of October the 15th. He in- 
tended, that, by omitting three intercalary days in four hun- 
dred years, the civil and solar year should keep together. 
This form of the year is called New Style. This altera- 
tion was ultimately adopted throughout the continent of 
Europe, with the exception of what is now the Russian 
empire. The Autocrat of Russia still adheres to the Old 
Style (or did till very recently), perhaps in consequence of 
the opposition which has existed for centuries between the 
Latin and Greek Churches. The English adopted the New 
Style in the year 1752. The error in computing time 
amounted then to eleven days. These were taken from the 
month of September, 1752 (five years after the founding of 
the First Church in this town), by calling the 3d of that 
month the 14th. To illustrate the case by a familiar ex- 
ample ; — a note of hand given on the 29th of January, 
1747, and payable after one hundred years, would not have 
become due till February 9th, 1847 ; it would not have run 
a hundred years till then. To take another example ; — a 
person born on the 29th of January, 1747, would not be 
a hundred years old till this very day (February 9th, 1847). 
Of course, then, the First Church in Pepperell was not one 
hundred years old till this very day. 

I have heard it stated, but I think it must be incorrectly, 
that, on the celebration above alluded to, it was said, that 
it is the practice not to regard the difference of Old Style 
and New, but to take the dates as they stand. If this were 
the practice (which it is not), it would surely be very absurd 
to call a thing a hundred years old, and to celebrate its age 
as such, when it still wanted eleven days of that age. Prac- 
tice cannot make that right which is lorong ; and it is a 
somewhat dangerous doctrine, to maintain from the pulpit 
that it can. 

This day, then, is the true centennial birthday of the 
First Church of Christ in Pepperell. And now the next 



8 

business is, to inquire who have the best right to celebrate 
it. The fact that it has already been celebrated by another 
church would seem to imply that we have not. But to 
those of us who had not the pleasure of attending that 
celebration, this fact might seem a mere innuendo, were it 
not that the whole case is laid open to view by this little 
pamphlet, which will form an important document in our 
present investigation. This pamphlet is a very recent pro- 
duction. On its title-page is this inscription in capital let- 
ters : — " Articles of Faith and Covenant of The Church of 
Christ in Pepperell." 

Having, thirteen years ago, been in due form ordained by 
a regular ecclesiastical council, minister of the First Church 
and Religious Society in Pepperell, you may well suppose 
this pamphlet struck me with some surprise. I looked into 
its pages with a good deal of curiosity. I found that it con- 
tained a statement of twelve separate articles of faith, some 
of them so exceedingly indefinite, that I ceased in a measure 
to wonder at the single definite article The, which appeared 
so very conspicuously on its title-page. I will not deny 
that my emotions were very peculiar. To all appearance, 
I had both lost and found a church, — had lost my own, 
and found somebody's else. I had for several years felt, 
I hope in some proper measure, my responsibleness as pastor 
of the First Church of Christ in Pepperell. But here was 
a printed document declaring that there was no such church 
in existence. I had for years supposed that there were two 
regularly constituted and very respectable churches in this 
town ; but here it was staring me in the face, in capitals, 
that there was only one. I knew that there were some- 
times mysteries in the creeds of churches ; but here was one 
touching their very existence. I finally concluded that it 
was best to deal with that as with every other mystery, 
both in and out of churches, — to let it alone until it ex- 
plained itself. This it has now done. The other church 
in this town (and in common courtesy I suppose I must 
for the present allow it its assumed title). The Church of 



Christ in Pepperell, by assuming to itself the prerogative of 
the First Church, and celebrating (somewhat prematurely) its 
centennial birthday, has given us to understand that the 
pamphlet is theirs, and they assume its responsibility. We, 
therefore, who supposed ourselves to be the First Church, 
are under the dire necessity of struggling, not for our tianie, 
nor for our rights, but for our very existence. The sen- 
tence, not of excommunication, nor of banishment, but of 
utter extinction, has gone forth. How happy should we 
feel, and how thankful should we be, that it is only our 
ecclesiastical, and not our mortal, body that is pressed to 
death, — that the screws and the lever are worked by an 
honest and good-hearted printer, and not by the soulless 
familiars of the Spanish Inquisition ! But we shall have 
the " benefit of clergy," ere we are put " in extremis " ; and 
as we are on trial before a Christian tribunal, we demand to 
be heard why sentence of utter extinction should not be 
passed upon us. Let it therefore be distinctly understood, 
that ive do not assume to be The Church of Christ in Pep- 
perell, — O, no ! that would be folly and presumption. The 
world would laugh at it ; and Heaven forbid that we should 
excite mirth, since to do so would be as conclusive proof of 
something wrong about us as if we incurred the world's 
displeasure. We assume only to be the First Church of 
Christ in Pepperell, without assuming to know whether 
there are one or a dozen churches besides us. Nor do we 
assume this Avithout serious and careful investigation of the 
matter at issue. 

With a view to establish our claims, we will now settle 
these two points : first, the general question. What is a 
Christian church ? and, secondly, the particular question, 
Who constitute the First Church in this town ? To settle 
the first of these questions, we shall ask no aid of human 
authorities. We are aware that the Roman Catholic hierar- 
chy maintain that theirs alone is the Christian Church, and 
that salvation is impossible beyond its pale. The Protestant 
Episcopalian insists, in behalf of his church, upon the divine 
2 



10 

right of bishops, the transmission of the apostolic office, and 
the divine appointment of the three orders of the clergy, — 
bishops, priests, and deacons. The multitudinous sects and 
denominations of Christendom contend each for its own 
creed, as an essential element of Christian discipleship, — 
the Orthodox Congregationalists of New England contending 
for a creed that is essentially Calvinistic. 

Now the impropriety of going to any of these numerous 
and mutually hostile authorities is perfectly obvious. Any 
one of these authorities is just as good as the other. They 
may all be regarded, mathematically, as equal antagonistic 
forces ; they neutralize each other, and no force or authority 
remains. " To whom, then, shall we go ? " We will an- 
swer, as we have asked, in the words of Simon Peter, — 
" Thou, Lord, hast the words of eternal life " ; and, we may 
add, of eternal truth. To Jesus, then, the great Head of 
the Church, the only infallible Teacher in things spiritual, 
we submit our question and our cause ; and we ask. What is 
a Christian church, recognized as such by him ? 

In the sixteenth chapter of the Gospel of St. Mark, at the 
fifteenth and sixteenth verses, we read thus : — " Go ye into 
all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature : he that 
believeth, and is baptized, shall be saved ; but he that believ- 
eth not shall be damned." Here we have, in a few words, 
the charge which Jesus gave to his disciples, when he sent 
them into the world to preach the gospel of salvation. 
What, now, it is in point to ask, did Jesus make the essen- 
tial prerequisites to salvation ? Faith and baptism, — faith 
in the self-commending truths of his religion, and a confes- 
sion of that faith before the world, by the ceremony of bap- 
tism. Whoever complied with these requirements was de- 
clared by the Saviour himself to be entitled to, or rather, to 
be in the possession of, salvation. Now, as salvation includes 
every thing that man can ask for, either in this world or in 
eternity, of course whatever is declared by Christ to be suf- 
ficient for salvation includes every thing essential, and, 
among other things, it includes both the meaning and the 



11 

reality of the Church, the Church of the Lord Jesus Christ. 
It is no earthly authority, then, that has any right to say 
who,«5, or who is not, of the Church. The Roman Cath- 
olic may say who is of his church, and who is not ; and the 
Protestant Episcopalian may do the same ; and so may the 
Orthodox Congregationalist. They may do this ; and no 
man, who is capable of marking differences and making dis- 
tinctions, need say any thing against it. People may be as 
impertinent and silly as they please. There is no statute 
law against that. But when they undertake to say, and that 
authoritatively, who is and who is not of the Church of 
Jesus Christ, then it is time to give heed. It is no longer 
a very appalling thing to be expelled from a Catholic, or 
an Episcopalian, or an Orthodox church. But to be denied 
the right of membership in the Church of Christ, and that 
too after all his requisitions have been complied with, is 
what every freeman in Christ will protest against. Faith, 
a sincere belief in the great doctrines and facts of the gospel, 
and an avowal of that faith before the world, is all that 
Jesus demanded of his followers throughout all coming time. 
And in view of the restrictions, the hedges and ditches, the 
pass-words and pass-keys, the shibboleths and sibboleths 
that modern religionists have got up around the Church, just 
think of the absurdity, the miserable absurdity, of inviting 
the Rev. Mr. A. of one town, and the Rev. Mr. B. of the 
next, to come with their respective lay-delegates, and see 
and say whether this church or that is a Ch'istian church ! 
Just as if certain clerical gentlemen, some of them very 
diminutive in size and not very great in intellect, and some 
of them vastly more gigantic in stature than in understand- 
ing, had Divine authority to say who do and who do not 
belong to the Church of Christ. No one who is a true dis- 
ciple of Christ attaches a feather-weight of importance to 
such men's authority ; and whosoever consents to be co7i- 
trolled by it stands convicted before the world of this tre- 
mendous sin, namely, of having made Christ, who is the 
sole Head of the Church, subordinate to mere men, — and 
sometimes very inferior men too. 



12 

To be really of the Church of Christ, then, is something 
more than to have one's name enrolled upon a catalogue ; it 
is something more than to be of "good standing" with. this, 
that, or any other denomination. Faith is the spiritual 
qualification, and baptism the outward sign of initiation ; 
and whoever possesses these may claim to be of the Chris- 
tian Church, let men say what they please. But "believe" 
what ? you will ask. And I acknowledge this question is 
seasonable and important ; because one sect will say, " Yes, 
you must believe in our creed " ; and another, " You must 
believe in ours." I will therefore answer the question, but 
not in my own name, nor in that of my sect, if I have one ; 
but in the words of an accredited and beloved disciple of 
Jesus, none other than St. John. " Whosoever," he says, 
"believeth that Jesus is the Christ is born of God." That 
declaration settles the question. Whosoever believeth that 
Jesus is " the Christ," that is, God's anointed or commis- 
sioned messenger, will, like a true disciple, be governed by 
his precepts, and be sustained by his promises. They who 
do this compose the Church of Christ, though they should 
be thrown by circumstances into churches of a hundred dif- 
ferent names ; and whosoever cannot exhibit these proofs 
or credentials, but rely solely upon their connection with 
this or that body of professing Christians, are not by any 
means necessarily of the Church of Christ. They may be 
members of churches, and those churches may be self-styled 
Christian churches. But in its high, its true, its holy sense, 
the Church of Christ is a church of souls, and not a church 
of bodies merely ; it is a communion of humble, devout, 
intelligent minds, and not a mere society of individuals 
leagued together for the maintenance of a creed. Viewing 
the matter in this light (and no one, I think, can deny that 
it is the true one), how very idle it is, how calculated to 
awaken the sentiment of pity in generous minds, if not the 
stronger feeling of contempt, for any number of individuals 
to style themselves, and print themselves, and thus proclaim 
themselves, " The Church of Christ," in a town of more 
than sixteen hundred inhabitants ! 



13 

This question being settled, let us now proceed to the 
particular question, Who constitute the First Church in the 
town of Pepperell ? I have sometimes heard a remark like 
this, made in reference to legal matters, that "possession is 
nine points in the law." I cannot explain the meaning of 
this phrase, nor do I know that it has a meaning. But I 
suppose it implies, that, when a person has been left in the 
undisturbed possession of an interest for a term of time, 
there is presumptive evidence that that property or interest 
is equitably his. Now there was never, to my knowledge, 
any public question or doubt of the right of the church con- 
nected with this parish to be called " The Church of Christ 
in Pepperell," until the organization of another church, and 
after that to be called, in common courtesy, " The First 
Church of Christ in Pepperell." Nor do I now believe that 
any such question did arise, until the publication of the 
above-mentioned pamphlet.* And it will not answer for the 
authors of that publication to say that its title-page leaves 
that question untouched. One of two things is undeniable : 
they either meant to make that church whose creed it pur- 
ports to be identical with the oj^iginal church in Pepperell, 
or else they meant to imply, and that very distinctly, that 
the church connected loith the First Parish is no church at 
all. If they admit the first part of this alternative, I tell 
them distinctly they are mistaken, and I shall demonstrate 
their error. If they mean what the last supposition implies, 
I shall not answer them at all, lest I should be betrayed into 
a want of courtesy, perhaps of civility, as great as their 
own. Such a wholesale process of excommunication would 
provoke a contemptuous smile as the only suitable reply. 

From the character of the evidence presented on the cen- 
tennial celebration (of which this is only a duplicate), I am 
satisfied that the first of the above suppositions was the one 
adopted and defended at that time. It was maintained, as 
I am informed, that the other church in this town, and I 

* See Note B. 



14 

shall henceforth call it the second church, ought to be re- 
garded as the origmal, because it held the same opinions 
and maintained the same doctrines that the founders of this 
church, in 1747, held and maintained. A more unfortunate, 
because a more easily disproved, position could not have 
been assumed. Facts, plain as the sunshine, and stubborn 
as the everlasting rocks, refute and annihilate every such 
assumption. To these facts I now invite your attention. 

The fifteen individuals who were first gathered into a 
church in this town, in 1747, so far as they had any specu- 
lative religious notions, were probably Calvinists ; that was 
the belief of their times. But if they were (and that is by 
no means a settled point), they were of the wiser and better 
sort of Calvinists ; for their " Covenant," by which they 
pledged themselves to each other, does not contain even 
one single Calvinistic doctrine. Whoever composed that 
instrument deserves to be held in high esteem ; for a better 
constructed covenant, saving perhaps something of its length, 
was never drawn up.* It begins thus : — 

" We, whose names are underwritten, do covenant with the Lord 
and with one another, and do solemnly bind ourselves before the 
Lord and his people, that we will, by the strength of Christ, walk 
after the Lord, in all his ways as he hath revealed them to us in his 
Holy Word. 

" Aet. I. We avouch the Lord Jehovah to he our God; and 
give up ourselves, with our children after us, in their several genera- 
tions, to be his people, and that in the sincerity and truth of our 
h earts. 

" Art. II. We give up ourselves to the Lord Jesus Christ, to be 
ruled and guided by him in the matters of his worship, and in our 
whole conversation acknowledging him not only our alone Saviour, 
but also our King to rule in and over us, as well as our Prophet to 
teach us by his word ; accordingly, we wholly disclaim our own 
righteousness in point of justification, cleaving to him for righteous- 
ness, grace, life, and glory." 

* I have since found that it is a copy, almost verbatim, of the Covenant of the 
First Church in Salem. 



16 

And there is all that can be found of theological doctrine. 
It then goes on with mutual promises "to walk by the help 
of Christ in the spirit of love with their brethren and sisters, 
to avoid all jealousies, backbitings, &:.c., to forgive and for- 
bear," and so on. So far as the expression of doctrinal 
views is concerned, it is, essentially. Unitarian ; and I should 
long ago have proposed to this church to go back to the 
covenant of the fathers, and adopt it, were it not that to 
make so many and such strong mutual pledges would seem 
too much like affectation. Still, there is not a doctrine ex- 
pressed in that covenant which is not in harmony with 
what is called " Liberal Christianity " at the present day. 

Let us now look at the creed of the Second Church in 
this town, as we have it published by themselves. Is it 
Calvinistic ? Not exactly ; because there is wanting in it 
one of the most prominent, and certainly one of the most 
dangerous, of the "five points," — the doctrine of the '-'per- 
severance of the saints." If the fathers of this church were 
Calvinists, as the churches of their period generally were, 
certainly this essential omission on the part of the Second 
Church vitiates completely their claim to be the successors 
of the original church. The omission is a fatal one. The 
members of the Second Church have renounced the faith 
of the fathers, as palpably as has any body else ; and will 
they still affect to rest their claim on the identity of their 
creed, — in other words, on the direct procession of their 
faith from the fathers ? It were folly to do so. 

Then, again, no person acquainted with theological sub- 
jects can read these " Articles of Faith " of the Second 
Church, without seeing, in almost every line, the effort to 
cloak the repulsive features of old-fashioned New England 
Calvinism. Such is the care with which the sublime in- 
consistencies of that system are softened, that, really, if the 
fifteen pioneers of the Church in Pepperell ivere Calvinists, 
and could come among us to-day, they would never sub- 
scribe that pamphlet as a statement of their faitli. 

Let us now take it the other way. Suppose that they were 



16 

just what their covenant solemnly signed would seem to 
imply that they were, — strong-minded, pious men, who felt 
the solemn worth of religion, who loved and honored Christ 
as their Teacher and Saviour, who cared nothing about the 
systems of theological doctors, but went for the great prac- 
tical facts of Christianity, and them alone. Surely, you 
would not saddle such men with such a complex and (ex- 
cuse me) contradictory creed as these "Articles of Faith." 
If you attempted to impose such a burden, the attempt would 
be in vain. The voice which still speaks in their " Cove- 
nant " is the voice of a rational and liberal Christianity, and 
will not say "Amen" to what is abhorrent to itself. Take 
it either way you please, then, call them Calvinists, or call 
them "rational and liberal Christians," the published creed 
of the other church in this town will not suit the fathers. 
The fathers of 1747 were quite unlike the sons of 1847. 
Consequently the present First Church has nothing to fear 
on this score. We do not deny that we have departed from 
the Calvinism of a hundred years ago, and so has every 
church in the Commonwealth. Our claim, therefore, is as 
good as any body's else claim ; and we have possession into 
the bargain. 

But this assumption by others of an identity of faith, that 
is, of believing as the fathers did, will not hold good, even 
in regard to this church under the ministry of its second 
pastor, the Rev. John Bullard. For the evidence on this 
point, I again have recourse to this pamphlet ("Articles of 
Faith," &c.). Here we have the creed of this church as it was 
in the day of the Rev. Mr. Bullard. That creed is decided- 
ly Trinitarian, and as decidedly anti-Calvinistic. It contains 
an explicit, straight-out avowal of the doctrine of the Trini- 
ty, which these " Articles " do not contain ; and while these 
"Articles" do avow the strange, the paralyzing doctrine of 
Predestination, Mr. Bullard's contains nothing of the kind. 
And yet, in the face and eyes of this pamphlet ("Articles of 
Faith," &c.), which itself proclaims the striking dissimilari- 
ty, the opposition in fact, of these creeds, the other church 



17 

in this town come forward and assert that their present 
creed has always been the creed of the church ; and all 
this after they themselves have printed these discordant 
creeds, and, under their own hands and seals, acknowledi^ed 
that they are discordarit. If this is not a theological hobble, 
an ecclesiastical blunder, for people to get into, then I do 
not know what is. 

Here is another fact worth looking at. If there has been 
no change of opinion, no alteration of the creed, since the 
Rev. Mr. Bullard's ordination, how happens it that the creed 
which was adopted then has been compelled to give place to 
these " Articles " ? It is more explicit, and, in my opinion, 
far more Scriptural, than they. Its language is clear, con- 
cise, and full. It contains but sis articles, while the present 
one contains twelve ! — iVnd yet no alteration. O, no ! Be- 
sides, it is Trinitarian, while the printed creed of the other 
church is not necessarily so, inasmuch as its third article 
implies Sabellianism far more plainly than it does Trinitari- 
anism. And yet, in spite of all these glaring departures from 
the old creed, it is maintained that there has been no change, 
— that the same faith is held now, that was held by the 
original fifteen members. "Credat Judseus Apella, non ego." 

In this connection I will notice certain other evidence that 
was offered at the recent centennial, to prove the orthodoxy 
of the Rev. Mr. BuUard. Two certificates, either oral or 
written, were furnished by two superannuated clergymen, 
who testified to this point. Both these clergymen, while 
they were actively engaged in the ministry, embraced the 
exclusive system, and shut out of their pulpits their brethren, 
men as wise, as good as themselves, and probably very 
much more efiicient. It can be proved by living witnesses, 
that when, on a certain occasion, the Rev. Mr. Bullard was 
speaking of the disgraceful fact, that the Rev. Mr. Beede of 
Wilton had been excluded from the pulpit in Mason, sole- 
ly because his views were not sufficiently exclusive, tears 
of mingled grief and indignation were coursing down his 
cheeks. The bold and enthusiastic soul of the second pastor 
3 



18 

of this church conld not brook the spiritual usurpation that 
was beginning to show itself in the New England churches ; 
and to the day of his death he held it in utter detestation. 

Let us look at the results of this early display of bigotry 
and spiritual tyranny. How stands the old Congregational 
Church in Mason ? I presume its ancient minister sees little 
in its condition to cheer his declining days. How is it with 
Wilton ? Its old Congregational Church, liberal always in 
its views, stands firm as its mountains, faithful in its alle- 
giance to God and to Christ, and watchful over the best in- 
terests of man. From that church have gone forth the 
Abbots, the Barretts, the Greeles, the Livermores, the Pea- 
bodies, and others, — men whose names are written, as it 
were, upon the firmament, — men of whom their native 
town may be proud, inasmuch as our whole Commonwealth 
is proud, and has reason to be proud, of them. 

But to the other certificate. This was furnished by a 
neighbouring clergyman, between whom and the Rev. Mr. 
Bullard, it is a notorious fact, a strong opposition of theo- 
logical sentiment prevailed during their whole lives ; and 
yet this gentleman came forward and testified to the Rev. 
Mr. Bullard's orthodoxy. He must, from all accounts, have 
been indebted to something besides his memory for his 
facts. — So much for those certificates. 

Another position which was taken in defence of the claim 
of the other church in this town to be considered The 
church, and the only one here, was the condition in which 
the church in this parish was left by the secession of a large 
majority of its members, in 1832. We will now look into 
this matter. At the centennial which was celebrated eleven 
days ago, it would seem that there was some uncertainty 
as to the number of those who did not choose to secede. I 
will therefore enlighten the public on that point. There 
remained of those who had been members of the church in 
the Rev. Mr. Bullard's day five individuals. To these I may 
add one more, in reference to whom a vote of excommuni- 
cation had been passed, — which vote he never regarded ; 



19 

and as I intend to make further use of this vote, I shall say- 
nothing more about it at present. There were two other in- 
dividuals, members of the church in the Rev. Mr. Bullard's 
day, with whom circumstances brought me acquainted. I 
was with them in their last sickness, conversed freely with 
them upon religious subjects, and officiated at their funerals ; 
and I hesitate not to say, that, if no special efforts had been 
made to prejudice their minds, they would never have de- 
serted the altar where they had worshipped for half a cen- 
tury. While, then, it is true, that, under the peculiar and 
excessive excitement which attended the separation in this 
parish, a majority of the church were induced to quit their 
associates, it also remains a fact that some remained, true to 
their vows. And now comes up the question. Who were 
the church, after this explosion of the original church into 
two fragments ? '' O, the majority must rule ! " some one 
will say. Yes, so I think. In all public matters, in which, 
in order to the very existence of society, a " Yes " or a 
" No " must be immediately forthcoming, the majority must 
rule. There 7?riist be action ; and surely it is not for the 
minority to say what that action shall be. But what par- 
ticular action calling for a vote is required of a Christian 
church ? Is it to decide what Christianity is ? No ; Christ 
has done that. Is it to exercise dominion over the faith of 
each other ? Certain ecclesiastical bodies, I believe, do this, 
notwithstanding St. Paul, in writing to the Corinthians, dis- 
avows on his own behalf and that of his brother-apostles 
the right to do any such thing. A majority of the church- 
members in this parish in 1832 voted to leave the parish, 
and go somewhere else. Well, they had a right to do so. 
But had they a right to compel those to go who did not wish 
to? I think not. It would have been a very miserable 
kind of " glorious liberty," to be compelled to bow down at 
another's bidding. Those who went had a right to go, and 
those who did not go had a right to stay. The question, 
then, arises, — Who broke their covenant vows, those who 
went, or those who staid ? They had mutually promised 



20 

and pledged themselves " to walk together in the exercise 
of all Christian charities towards each other." Who broke 
this covenant, this solemn vow ? Not they, surely, who re- 
mained quiet in their places ; they did nothing to forfeit 
their Christian name and rights. This being so, they were, 
in proportion to their numbers, as good a church as were 
they that seceded. Put the most unfavorable construction 
upon their case, and they were at least the fractional part of 
the church, and those who had left were nothing more. 
The claim is just as good one way as the other ; and it is 
only an act of usurpation for the largest fraction to call itself 
The Church of Christ in Pepperell, when others, with an 
equally good claim, deny that right. 

A portion of the church, then, remained quietly faithful to 
their covenant vows, worshipping where they had worship- 
ped for years, and maintaining, without any interruption, the 
Christian ordinances. Suppose, now, that this remnant had 
been disposed to exercise somewhat of that secular power 
of which they have seen and experienced so much, how 
would they have proceeded ? They would have called a 
church meeting, summoned the refractory absentees to ap- 
pear, and then voted, that, if they did not return to their 
covenant obligations by a certain day, they should every 
man, woman, and child be cut off. This very thing had 
been done by the whole church, only a little while before, 
and, as the case is relevant to the question now at issue, I 
will rehearse it. Mr. ****j for causes which he deemed 
satisfactory (and I have no doubt, that, to a man of his ner- 
vous and excitable temperament, they wei^e satisfactory), ab- 
sented himself for a long time from the ordinance of the 
Lord's Supper. He was "dealt with" and expostulated 
with to no purpose. The idea was fixed immovably in his 
mind, that his brethren looked upon him with no kindly 
feelings. He therefore met every proposal to retunl to the 
ordinance with a decided refusal. He was led into this 
wrong persuasion by his morbid sensitiveness, which, as you 
know, was eventually the cause of his death. The vote of 



21 

the church was allowed to take effect. When I became the 
minister of this society, I found him in communion with this 
church. I spoke to him, in a friendly manner, of the pro- 
priety of some action in reference to the record of his case ; 
but he was morbidly sensitive on the subject, and I dropped 
it. The whole matter belongs now to a higher tribunal, 
and there let it be decided. But I appeal to this case only 
to show how the church, in its palmy days, treated a matter 
of this kind. Acting upon this precedent, how should the 
little remnant that was left have proceeded, when so many 
absented themselves from the ordinances ? They should 
have quietly passed a vote, that, if the absentees did not re- 
turn to their duty by a certain day, they should every soul 
be excommunicated, — deacons and all. Who would have 
had an ecclesiastical existence then ? Who would have 
been the successors of the original church ? I take it, not 
the excommunicated portion. If a majority of votes is deci- 
sive of questions of discipline at one time, it is so at another. 
If a majority, in one case, could cut off an absentee member 
(against whom nothing was alleged but his absenteeism), it 
would in all cases, though the number of the absentees 
might be legion. Agreeably to a precedent which they had 
themselves established, only a year or two before the separa- 
tion, the seceders would have been simply a company of 
excommunicated church-members, — at liberty, of course, 
to call themselves what they pleased, provided they did not 
take a name already appropriated. 

Bat now we have reached another point in this argument 
or investigation. Some of you may wish to know upon 
what ground, or for what reasons, the church voted to for- 
sake the ancient altar, and go forth to erect another some- 
where else. What injustice did they experience ? What 
wrongs were inflicted upon them ? Was their religious lib- 
erty invaded ? Did an ungodly generation interfere with 
the solemn observances of religion ? Did the members of 
the First Parish, — and in those days that meant the inhab- 
itants of the town at large, — did they act as oppressors? 



22 

Did they violate the law of equal rights ? Did they claim 
any thing which did not belong to them as a Christian con- 
gregation ? If they did, then the church did right in pro- 
testing against popular usurpation ; and for one, I would 
honor them for so doing. These inquiries make it neces- 
sary to go back some years in the history of this religious 
society. On some accounts I regret this necessity, on other 
accounts I rejoice in this opportunity. 

In the year 1837, I took occasion, at a meeting of the 
church of the First Parish in this town, to suggest the pro- 
priety of appointing a committee for the purpose of examin- 
ing the records of the church, with a view to correcting any 
ex parte and erroneous statements, and explaining any facts 
that might need elucidation. Such a committee was ap- 
pointed ; and as their report is precisely what is wanted in 
this place, I shall read it from the Church Records. 

" At a special meeting of the First Church of Christ in Pepperell, 
held at the house of Deacon John Walton, the following report was 
presented by the committee chosen and instructed to examine the 
Records of the Church, with a view to correct any misstatements, 
and likewise to furnish a fair history of the recent important changes 
in the religious affairs of this town. 

" We regard the duty which has been assigned us as one of no 
ordinary importance. We are aware that the records of an ancient 
church are eagerly perused by the antiquary and the religious his- 
torian. Recourse is often had to such records to establish general 
historical points, and to find illustrations of the moral and religious 
character of different eras and generations. The religious origin 
and character of such records secure to them great respect and con- 
fidence. It is, therefore, the sacred duty of every church to see 
that no erroneous statements or impressions are conveyed to pos- 
terity through this medium. So long as man is fallible, all records 
are liable to be imperfect ; and gross injustice may be done, even 
when no wrong was intended. For these reasons, the members of 
the First Church in Pepperell deem it their duty to examine strictly 
their records, so far as they relate to the recent eventful changes in 
the society. Convulsions of no ordinary character have rent the 
church to its very foundations. The feelings which have been ex- 



23 

cited on all sides have been unfavorable to a clear perception of 
truth, and a just allowance of the claims and rights of individuals. 
The records of the church during the recent commotions are of 
course ex parte statements. They give the views and present the 
doings of only a part of the society. The present members of this 
church are disposed to think that justice has not been done, in all 
cases, to all parties. They cannot, therefore, in justice to them- 
selves, to their children, and to the cause of rational Christianity, 
permit statements, of whose inaccuracy they are convinced, and 
whose tendency must be to perpetuate a most unjust reproach upon 
themselves, to go down to posterity uncorrected. They cannot con- 
sent to set their hands and seals to their own shame, by permitting 
these records to remain unexplained. 

"The records of this church subsequent to January 25, 1832, 
indicate a state of dissension between different portions of the First 
Parish in Pepperell. There are frequent intimations, that the just 
rights of the pastor and the church were disregarded, in a manner 
the most unjustifiable. We will proceed to particularize sundry pas- 
sages. On the r27th page there is an entry in these words : — ' An 
ecclesiastical council was convened at Pepperell, this day, February 
1, 1832. The Rev. James Howe presented the doings of the First 
Parish, and of the church ; and the clerk of the Evangelical Congre- 
gational Society of Pepperell the doings of said society, by which 
the following facts were shown.' Some of these ' facts,' so called, are 
as follows. Under the head of Article 3d, it is stated, — ' That peace 
and harmony prevailed among the people of this society, to a good 
degree, till May, 1831, when a vote was obtained in town-meeting, 
that the Liberal party should occupy the meeting-house for several 
Sabbaths.' Article 4th, — ' That since that time there has been a 
continued and undeviating determination on the part of the First 
Parish to destroy the peace of the church, and to have such preach- 
ing as we deem subversive of the great truths of the gospel of 
Christ.' Herein is intimated, first, that the commencement of dis- 
turbances in the parish was of so recent a date as May, 1831. 
Secondly, that, subsequently to that time, there was a continued de- 
termination to destroy the peace of the church ; and, thirdly, that 
the church were under the necessity of withdrawing from the meet- 
ing-house, and worshipping elsewhere. It is further recorded, that, 
in view of these ' facts,' the council passed a vote approving the 
course pursued by the pastor, and ratifying the same, 'and admiring 



24 

with gratitude the goodness of God in leading the church to take the 
measures they did.' In an address delivered to the seceding portion 
of the church, by Rev. John Todd, of Groton, on the above-men- 
tioned occasion, the above statements are recognized as true, and 
that portion of the church are addressed as having suffered the great- 
est wrongs and outrages. In this address, while one part of the so- 
ciety is called a ' shelterless flock and an altarless church,' the other 
is stigmatized as ' opposers of Evangelical religion,' are deliberately 
charged with being guilty of persecution, of driving their fellow- 
Christians ' from the fountain at which they were baptized, from the 
altar at which they sacrificed, and from the house of prayer where 
their feet first entered on holy ground.' 

" While it is a painful, it is also the solemn duty of the present 
members of this church to enter their firm protest against these 
statements. It is, indeed, a serious proceeding, when the disciples of 
Christ, to do themselves justice, must sift the actions and the words 
of their brethren ; and, while they vindicate their own religious 
character and reputation, must fix a reproach for ever upon that of 
others. Nevertheless, we, the members of the First Church in this 
town, in view of our responsibility to the great Head of the Church, 
do solemnly protest against the statements contained in these records. 
In justification of our protest, we invite the attention of posterity to 
a dispassionate detail of facts, — to a history of the troubles in the 
First Parish in Pepperell. 

" For the origin of these troubles, we must look to a period con- 
siderably earlier than the time assigned on the face of these records. 
The troubles in this, as in almost all the New England territorial 
parishes, date from the commencement of that system of priestly 
exclusion which began near the commencement of the present cen- 
tury. The operation of this system was to exclude from the pulpits 
of those Congregationalists who adopted the exclusive policy those 
clergymen who did not choose to forego their rights as men and 
Christians who were unwilling to give up the great principle of 
the Reformation, and who were not to be driven to bow themselves 
in submission to the creed of a party. In consequence of the exclu- 
sive spirit prevailing in different rehgious societies, many clergymen 
far advanced in age, preeminent in learning and piety, and exem- 
plary in all things, were excluded from pulpits to which they had 
hitherto been freely admitted, an<l where their ministrations had 
always been welcomed, as tending to edification and the salvation of 



25 

souls. It is not surprising, that, in consequence of this, excitements 
prevailed extensively, and that religious revolutions became frequent. 
Heart-burnings and jealousies sprang up among both ministers and 
people. As the system of exclusiveness became more openly avowed, 
it was pressed the more strongly and unblushingly. The clergy be- 
gan to compel those to come into it, whose sense of Christian duty for- 
bade such proceedings. Threats of excommunication and oppression 
were thrown out, and a spirit manifested which might be expected 
in a Roman Pontiff or a Spanish Inquisition, but which was hardly to 
be expected in New England. 

" In common with other societies in this Commonwealth, the peo- 
ple of Pepperell felt a natural fear that this spirit of exclusion jnight 
find its way among themselves, to the disturbance of religious peace, 
the wounding of the church, the sundering of families, and the intro- 
duction of all those public and domestic evils which have attended 
acts of spiritual despotism. 

" During the ministry of the Rev. John BuUard, although it was 
well understood that differences of opinion upon theological points 
existed among the Congregational clergy, no clerical brother was 
excluded from the interchange of pulpit services. At the decease of 
the Rev. Mr. BuUard, which occurred at a time when the spirit of 
exclusiveness began to manifest itself fully and strongly, the society 
felt a reasonable fear, that, unless caution was used, the evils which 
were already felt in other churches might be introduced into their 
own. Accordingly, when a candidate was sought for ordination, this 
was made a prominent consideration. The choice of the society at 
length fell upon Rev. James Howe. In view of his attainments as 
a scholar, of his qualifications as a Christian, and of his general 
reputation for liberal and charitable feeling, he was invited to take 
the charge of this society, as its pastor. An ordaining council was 
called, consisting of pastors and delegates from Congregational 
churches, nine of which were avowedly Unitarian, and eleven Trini- 
tarian. 

" The events which took place at the ordination indicate plainly 
the feelings, wishes, and fears of the society. Much discussion was 
had in the parish, as to the future proceedings of the candidate in 
regard to ministerial exchanges. Distrust was excited, which event- 
ually became so strong, that, on the morning of the ordination, a 
remonstrance (signed by seventy-nine voters) against the ordination 
was presented to the ordaining council. On consulting with the 
4 



26 

remonsirants, it was found that the sole objection to further proceed- 
ings by the council was the fear that the Rev. Mr. Howe might adopt 
a policy in regard to exchanges which would not meet the wishes 
and expectations of the parish. To satisfy the people on this point, 
explicit questions were proposed to the candidate. The answer 
given by him will be best learned from statements given under their 
own hands, by several members of the ordainiag council. The 
Rev. Dr. Ripley, of Concord, moderator of the council, being re- 
quested to state by letter what took place in the council on this par- 
ticular subject, writes as follows : — 'I have the impression that the 
remonstrants were fearful that Mr. Howe would become too Ortho- 
dox, or Calvinistic, for them, and would refuse exchanges with Lib- 
eral clergymen. Mr. Howe was interrogated on the subject of 
exchanges, and he satisfied the council, that he intended to exchange 
pulpits with Liberal and Orthodox ministers, and that exclusiveness 
was not agreeable to his mind or his views of propriety. To convey 
his ideas more clearly, he said, he should be ready to exchange with 
any of the clergymen of the council.' The Rev. David Damon, 
scribe of the council, writes as follows: — 'Mr. Howe was ques- 
tioned in council to this effect, perhaps in these very words : — Are 
you willing to hold ministerial intercourse, and exchange pulpits, 
with all ordained Congregational ministers in regular standing, with- 
out respect to the differences of sentiment which exist among them ? 
To this Mr. Howe replied, that he was entirely willing to exchange 
with every minister belonging to the council ; and upon a subsequent 
repetition of the question, repeated the same, with additional remarks, 
which I understood to mean that he should be willing to exchange 
with other ministers also, of sentiments similar to those held by the 
gentlemen of the council.' The Rev. Dr. Thayer, of Lancaster, 
writes as follows : — 'At the ordination of Mr. Howe, and knowing 
that he had received his theological education under direction of 
those who patronized the " exclusive " course, which had then com- 
menced, I proposed to him a question of this import, — May the 
Liberal ministers in this neighbourhood, as they are called, rely on 
your holding intercourse with them in the way of exchanges ? He 
gave an affirmative answer, which was so entirely satisfactory to me, 
that I voted for the ordination.' The Rev. Mr. Bascom, of Ashby, 
writes thus : — ' After the usual examination preparatory to ordi- 
nation. Dr. Thayer and Mr. Damon said there was yet one point on 
which they wished to question the candidate, and hoped to receive 



27 

a clear and explicit reply, — that was as to his future intended 
course of ministerial exchanges. Much conversation was had on the 
subject, in which many of the soi-disant Orthodox endeavoured to 
prevent a direct reply, and insisted that Mr. Howe ought not to be 
required to pledge himself as to any particular course he might 
hereafter think proper to adopt. Dr. Thayer and Mr. Damon were, 
however, decided in their views that it was proper for them to know, 
before placing him in the pulpit, whether he, having obtained the 
place through their aid, would afterwards keep them and such as 
they out of it. Mr. Howe appeared candid and ingenuous. I may 
not recollect his words, but I know the impression they left on my 
mind, when his final answer was given, — " You see the complexion 
of this council ; I shall exchange with them, and with gentlemen of 
like views, without any discrimination on account of particular theo- 
logical tenets." Dr. Thayer remarked that he was satisfied, and I 
believe all the Liberal part of the council were so.' The letters from 
which these extracts are taken remain on file with the clerk of the 
parish, and give a full account of the proceedings of the council, and 
of the matters which transpired at their sitting. 

" The answer thus given, the promise thus explicitly made by the 
candidate, allayed the fears of the remonstrants, and their opposition 
was withdrawn. The letters from which extracts have now been 
presented establish these several facts : — first, that Mr. Howe was 
ordained over a parish that was decidedly liberal in its feelings and 
expectations, and opposed to that unchristian policy which was 
creeping into the churches ; secondly, that he promised to consult 
these feelings and expectations, and that in regard to them he made 
distinct promises which were deemed satisfactory ; and, thirdly, that 
solely in consequence of these promises, all opposition was with- 
drawn. 

" Exchanges were made agreeably to promise, and for some years 
harmony prevailed. So long as the promises thus given were re- 
deemed, no trouble was made. But, at length, when it was deter- 
mined by a portion -of the Congregational clergy of this Common- 
wealth, self-styled Orthodox, to compel every minister either to dis- 
continue exchanges with Unitarians, or be expelled from the fellow- 
ship of his brethren, and abide the consequences, it was found that 
Unitarian ministers would no longer be admitted to the pulpit in 
Pepperell. It was then that troubles began. Those of the society 
who had, on the strength of Mr. Howe's promises, discontinued all 



28 

opposition, found, too late, that these promises were not to be re- 
deemed, and that their own just expectations were to be disap- 
pointed. They accordingly felt themselves called upon to regain, 
if possible, those rights of which they found themselves deprived. 
Communications passed between the pastor and the people, in which 
the request was directly made, that he would, agreeably to promise, 
continue his exchanges with Liberal clergymen. This request was 
distinctly declined. The only alternative which remained to the 
Liberal portion of the society was, either to forego the expression of 
their feelings and the enjoyment of their just rights, or else to avail 
themselves of the legal means of regaining those rights. Accord- 
ingly, an appeal was made to the society at large, and, after sundry 
trials, a vote was passed in town-meeting, granting to the Liberal 
party the use of the meeting-house for a certain number of Sabbaths 
in the year, — the pulpit to be supplied at the expense of that por- 
tion of the society, without in any way affecting the salary of Mr. 
Howe. 

" This is the entire amount and extent of the ' persecution,' 'driv- 
ing their fellow-Christians from the sanctuary,' &c., so frequently 
and strongly set forth in these records. Had the above vote been 
allowed to go into peaceful operation, the subsequent unhappy occur- 
rences would have been avoided. The inhabitants of Pepperell 
might have still constituted an undivided religious community, — 
have worshipped where their fathers worshipped, — have gone to the 
house of God in company, and there communed together. Directly 
upon the passage of this vote, the portion of the society styling 
themselves Orthodox separated themselves from the parish, and 
were organized as a distinct society. 

" Upon the facts now exhibited, the present members of this 
church, in behalf of themselves and of their fellow-citizens of the 
First Parish, would ground the following declarations : — First, that 
in any struggle which may have arisen between different portions of 
the First Parish in Pepperell, the Liberal party have contended for no 
privilege other than what is secured to them by civil and ecclesi- 
astical law. Secondly, that they asked for nothing beyond what 
was implied as their just due, in the calling of a council in which 
Unitarian or Liberal sentiments were recognized as distinctly as 
Trinitarian or Orthodox. Thirdly, that to secure to themselves the 
enjoyment of their rights and privileges, so far as the candidate for 
ordination was concerned, an explicit promise was required and re- 



29 

ceived, that on this score there should be no cause of complaint. 
And, finally, that the facts in the case show that this promise was 
not fulfilled, 

" We now ask confidently, — and we might ask in the tones of 
injured and indignant men, — Where has been the persecution ? Who 
have prevented ' the faith once delivered to the saints ' from being 
heard in the ancient place of worship in this town ? Have they 
been guilty of these enormities, who have simply asked to be allowed 
their just, their unquestioned rights ? 

" A century hence, the reader of these records, could he know 
fully what feelings have been indulged and what scenes have been 
witnessed among his ancestors, would deem it unaccountable that 
such excitements could have been produced by such seemingly in- 
adequate causes. These records, however, contain a partial solution 
of the mystery. Let him read the address recorded on the 129th 
page, as delivered by Rev. J. Todd, before the seceding members 
of this church, on their re-organization as a separate body. Coming 
as it did from one whose sacred office required him to soothe, rather 
than excite, the bitterness of the human heart, it ought to have borne 
a different stamp. Unless its secret purpose was to irritate and 
inflame, it was a very misjudged production. Its inflammatory ten- 
dency is visible in every line. It has every appearance of having 
been designed to magnify imaginary wrongs, in the eyes of a people 
already prepared to regard themselves as the subjects of gross op- 
pression. When the speaker, in that address, deliberately hands 
over the supposed opposers of the church to the vengeance of God, 
he must have forgotten his own need of mercy. Indeed, the address 
seems to us to have been providentially inserted in these records. 
It furnishes an explanation of the singularly bitter feelings which 
have prevailed in this and other religious societies. It is a melan- 
choly record of the unblushing effrontery of the clergy, and, at the 
same time, a token of the credulity of the people of this generation. 
We look upon that address as a memorial of the bigotry of an erring 
age. When it is intimated that the wrath of God will overtake ' the 
enemies of the church,' we are contented to remember, that ' ven- 
geance belongeth to the Lord,' and that ' the Judge of all the earth 
will do right.' We are to be judged, not by an earthly record, but 
by one in heaven. Still, we are disposed to entertain a reasonable 
regard for the judgment of posterity. We have, therefore, furnished 
this statement of facts in our own vindication. That portion of the 



30 

parish who are denominated the Liberal party have only acted upon 
the broad principle of New England Congregationalism, namely, 
that each religious society is independent of any foreign control in 
matters of faith and government. They avowed, and were in fact 
the only party who did avow, the great principle of the Reformation, 
namely, that the Bible is the only sufficient rule of faith and prac- 
tice. They were actuated by a lawful purpose. If, in effecting that 
purpose, unchristian feeUngs have been excited and painful scenes 
witnessed, the sin and guilt must lie at their doors who made resist- 
ance necessary^ and compelled their fellow-men to assume the atti- 
tude of a resolute self-defence. 

" In behalf of the committee. 

" Charles Babbidge, Chairman. 

" Pepperell, March 22, 1837." 

So much in answer to the question, whether the seceding 
members of this church were driven out, or went out of 
their free will and pleasure. 

I believe that I have now met, in all its points, the argu- 
ment which was submitted eleven days ago, in opposition 
to the right of the church connected with this parish to be 
styled the First Church of Christ in Pepperell. We have 
gone to the great Head of the Church, as the only compe- 
tent authority to settle the question of its meaning and 
character. Upon the authority of Scripture, and the usage 
of Apostolic times, we maintain that a church, spiritnally 
viewed, has no existence otherwise than as it is the " body 
of Christ " ; regarded visibly, it is made up of that portion 
of a Christian society who covenant or agree to walk to- 
gether in certain specified particulars ; in its corporate capa- 
city, it is an association availing itself of the conveniences 
which are afforded by the public provision for the worship 
of God. When any portion of such an association, whether 
by vote or otherwise, rescind their covenant or mutual agree- 
ment, then they cease to be members of that association or 
church, and are at liberty to go where they please, — they, of 
course, holding themselves accountable to God for their act. 
But they have no right to take with them the common prop- 
erty of the concern, nor the common name of those who 



31 

remain faithful to their covenant. Those who withdrew 
from this house voted to do so ; — they had a right to do so. 
By their own act, they dissolved their connections with the 
First Church. 

I have also met, in all its points, the argument based upon 
the supposed fact, that the theological creed of the church 
in this town had remained unchanged, and was still retained 
in all its purity by the present Second Church in this town. 
Under their own hands we have it, that the covenant of the 
original church was decidedly liberal in its spirit, and free 
from the disputed points of theology ; that the creed of 
the Rev. Mr. Bullard was distinctly Trinitarian and decided- 
ly anti-Calvinistic ; and that the present " Articles of Faith " 
of the Second Church are not necessarily Trinitarian, though, 
in the main, openly Calvinistic. If, with all these acknowl- 
edged variations and discrepancies, that church still asserts 
that it retains the original creed unaltered, then verily it may 
go on to assert any thing, for nobody will think of contra- 
dicting it. 

The church worshipping in connection with the First 
Parish claims to be the First Church. But upon what 
grounds ? Not upon the ground of an identity of faith with 
the original founders. O, no ! We believe, that, in the lapse 
of centuries, the prophetic saying of the great and good John 
Robinson, the minister of that goodly company who set- 
tled at Plymouth, has been fulfilled. He believed and pre- 
dicted that truth was to beam anew from the pages of God's 
holy word. We believe that it has ; and that the systems 
of mere men have yielded to "the truth as it is in Jesus," — 
that the lamps of Augustine and Chrysostom, of Calvin and 
Luther, have paled and almost gone out, beside that brighter 
light which is destined ultimately to enlighten the world. 
We found our claim upon a sincere and earnest wish and 
effort to catch the beams of this luminary, and to concen- 
trate them upon the revelation of God in Scripture and in 
Nature. We found our claim upon the unshackled and pro- 
gressive spirit and character of our religion. We care not 



32 

for Calvinism, nor for Arminianism, " sm6," super, nor suhter ; 
we go for " the truth as it is in Jesus," — and that in the 
liberal spirit which characterized the founders of this church, 

— the irrepressible spirit which showed itself in those wor- 
thies who marched from beneath the walls of this meeting- 
house, to offer themselves a willing sacrifice of blood on 
the high altar of civil freedom at Charlestown, — that spirit 
of independence, that love of popular liberty, which is ever 
active in the hearts of our townsmen, save ivhen occasionally 
their sectarian ardor gets the better of their candor and sense 
of justice. 

And now, having met the argument, I must be indulged 
a moment, while I bestow due attention upon the poetry 
contained in the recent " centennial " sermon. Allusion 
was made, as I understand, to the changes which have taken 
place in many of the old territorial parishes in Massachusetts, 

— changes from Calvinism to a more liberal and Scriptural 
faith. It was intimated that the light had gone out in them, 

— that they stood like dead trees, — that the wind, as it 
whistled through their dry and leafless branches, discoursed 
" ^olian music," — but "no leaves, no fruit, were there." 
This is undoubtedly good poetry, for it has been admired a 
great many years. But, like most poetry, it is, in the main, 
fiction, — it is not quite true. Nevertheless, it awakens the 
recollection of "things mournful to the soul." As the trav- 
eller passes through the town adjoining us on the west, and 
sees that venerable meeting-house, so simply, and yet, in 
some respects, so quaintly fashioned, with its broad, wide- 
reaching roof, its curiously and elaborately constructed tow- 
er, he is forcibly and sadly reminded of other days. There 
stands a monument of old Congregationalism. There it 
stands, solitary and deserted, on the mount of sacrifice, where 
the hands of a departed generation placed it, and where their 
prayers consecrated it to the worship of Almighty God. 
Thither, year after year, went up the inhabitants of that 
town, parents and children, brothers and sisters, neighbours, 
friends, and fellow-Christians ; and there they bowed in 



33 

humble prayer together, — one people, one minister, in the 
presence of the one only living and true God. Within that 
shrine, and around that altar, — now bearing other marks 
than those of '' Time's eflacing fingers," — fathers and 
mothers gathered, to sprinkle upon the infant's brow the em- 
blem of spiritual purity, to " sign it with the sign of the 
cross." There, too, the bereaved went up on God's holy 
day, to find comfort in their affliction, and strength in their 
sorrow, while all their fellow-worshippers united in a fervent 
prayer in their behalf. From the steeple of that house went 
out, year after year, the Sabbath call to Christian worship ; 
and they who neglected the voice of the living preacher, 
or whom circumstances debarred the privilege of social 
worship, could hear the voice of this religious monitor sweep- 
ing along their fields, and entering at every dwelling, and 
even telling the inhabitants of other towns that their breth- 
ren were wending their ways to the house of God. How 
is it now ? For years that church has stood a mouldering 
wreck ; no call to prayer issues from its tower ; no voice 
is heard within its walls, save that of the wind moaning 
over the desolation of the place. There, indeed, is iEolian 
music ; but it never swells into the tones of the loud, tri- 
umphant chorus. No ; the courts of the Most High are 
deserted and desolate. And how happens it? — hoiv happens 
it ? You have in that house, and in every thing that apper- 
tains to it, an illustration of the consequences of sectarian 
strife. The citizens of that town were told, in common 
with the citizens of other towns, that they must adopt a 
narrow, sectarian, exclusive policy, — a creed, not of Christ, 
but of Calvin, — not of rational and liberal Christianity, but 
of Orthodoxy. And you see the result. There stands the 
"dead tree" with its "dry branches"; and Orthodoxy is 
welcome to all that has followed, — in a special manner, 
to all the biographical glory of one of its ministers. 

And I have in my mind's eye one other "dead tree." I 
have had occasion, once or twice in my life, to pass through 
a town in this county, situated many miles off, and there I 
5 



34 

saw another of the old churches of Massachusetts. For 
many years the preaching in that house was of the most 
severe form of Calvinism ; and, had I time, I could relate a 
fact in illustration of the moral effects of such preaching, — 
a fact in relation to an individual who was executed, many 
years ago, for a capital offence. There stands the church, 
in all the imposing grandeur of its primitive architecture. 
But it is deserted ; and it has been so for years. The 
people outgrew Calvinism, and were too poor, in a divided 
state, to bear the expenses of public worship. Their house 
stands empty and useless. It is a " dead tree." Yes, dead. 
And there, close beside it, is the place where the vermin 
burrowed that gnawed out the life of the brave old oak. 
There stands a little church, — a church much smaller than 
many a village school-house, — and close beside stands, or 
stood, a grog-shop of three times its dimensions. And who 
wonders ? Divide the hearts of a people, set them unneces- 
sarily at variance on any subject, no matter what, and vice 
will thrive among them triumphantly. You destroy, utter- 
ly annihilate, the public sense of right, and justice, and secu- 
rity ; and amid mutually conflicting moral influences, the 
wrongdoer can work successfully and safely. 

From the manner in which these " dead trees " were no- 
ticed, one would suppose that they constituted a forest. But 
it is not so. The old parishes in Massachusetts, having noth- 
ing to rely upon under God but simple truth, and scorning 
to engender an artificial excitement in the community, have 
had heavy burdens to bear, and have borne them patiently 
and well. Their life is strong within them. Theirs is a 
righteous cause, and God will help them sustain it. But 
let us look a little more closely into the condition of some 
of these old societies, — these "dead trees." We shall per- 
haps discover some facts which will serve to show the 
relative condition and progress of Calvinism and Liberal 
Christianity. In the year 1845, there were in the city of 
Boston eighty-one religious societies. Of these twenty-nine 
were Unitarian ; Orthodox Congregationalist, thirteen. Pre- 



35 

viously to the year 1700, there were in the city of Boston 
eleven Congregational societies ; of these, every one is now 
Unitarian, with the single exception of the " Old South." 
And are these ^^ dead trees"? Indeed, they are not. They 
are vigorous and strong in their old age. Their branches 
bear up their leafy honors into the bright sunshine. There 
is " music " among those branches. And what is it ? I 
will tell you. It is the mingled songs of widows and or- 
phans, who have been saved from destitution and misery 
by the charities of Liberal Christians. It is the "unwritten 
music " of the blind mingling sweetly with the heart-music 
of the deaf*and dumb. It is the softened voices of rough 
sailors and hoarse men-of-war's men, who, instead of curs- 
ing each other, and blaspheming God's holy name, are sing- 
ing " psalms, and hymns, and spiritual songs. ' It is the 
melody of souls that have been redeemed from sin and spir- 
itual death by the benevolent efforts and zeal of Liberal 
Christians. It is a harmony of sounds sweeter far than that 
of "^olian music." It is the out-gushing of gladness from 
hearts that shall hereafter unite in a general song of thanks- 
giving before the throne of God. 

And who are they who have been instrumental in effecting 
these happy changes, these glorious conversions ? Liberal 
Christians. Who have ever been most forward in works of 
zeal and practical benevolence ? Who have been eyes to the 
blind, and ears to the deaf? Who have been ever ready to 
shelter the orphan, and protect the widow ? With whom 
originated the Ministry to the Poor, the Benevolent Frater- 
nity of the Churches, the Samaritan societies, and other 
blessed ministries ? With Liberal Christians. Who are 
they who are ever " foremost among the foremost found," 
in the cause of the Bible, of emancipation, of temperance, 
of education, and of religion " pure and undefiled " ? Liber- 
al Christians. And for this reason, it should be a matter 
of rejoicing that their religious views are advancing in the 
world with such an unprecedented rapidity. " In the year 
1826, Dr. Chalmers boasted for Scotland, that all the church 



36 

accommodations possessed by Unitarians in that country, put 
together, would only afford seats for fifteen hundred people, 
and that one half of them were unoccupied. This boast 
was then true. Noio a single congregation alone — the 
Glasgow Unitarian congregation — numbers a body of peo- 
ple connected with it greater than Dr. Chalmers assigned, 
sixteen years ago, to the whole kingdom. Eleven other 
societies have been formed, and there is a clear prospect of 
a greater increase. In 1820, there was not a single Unitarian 
congregation in Ireland ; now there are thirty-nine, and the 
number continues to increase every year. And why this 
wonderful increase in the kingdom of Great B«itain, with- 
in so short a time ? The answer is in part contained in 
the fact, that it is only twenty-four years since Parliament 
removed the legal penalties with which the profession of 
Unitarian opinions was punished. There are now in Eng- 
land three hundred Unitarian congregations. On the con- 
tinent of Europe Liberal Christianity is advancnig with the 
same rapidity. In Switzerland, it is triumphant in the 
church and city of Geneva, the chosen abode of John Calvin ; 
and it is gaining ground in the other cantons. So it is 
throughout the continent." 

In 1825, the whole number of Congregational Unitarian 
societies in the United States was one hundred and twenty. 
It is now three hundred. Besides these, there are in the 
United States two thousand Unitarian societies distinguished 
by the denominational names of Christians, Universalists, 
and Friends, making in all about two thousand three hun- 
dred.* 

Do you ask to what is to be attributed this unprecedented 
spread of liberal religious views ? It is precisely what might 
and must be expected from the character and tendencies of 
the age. It is an inquiring age ; it is a bold and determined 
one ; and any and every system, be it moral, religious, or 
political, must submit to the ordeal of sober truth and reason. 

* Orthodox Congregationalists, 1,420. — Jimerican Almanac for 1846. 



37 

Men are daily losing their reverence for human authority ; 
and in nothing more rapidly than in religion. It is in vain 
that you tell them that a doctrine which is "contrary to 
reason" is "above reason." They are ready to reply, that 
they doubt the soundness and the accuracy of that reason 
which lays down such a principle. They will not consent 
to be tied to a system, whether religious or civil, which they 
have outgrown. If you attempt to resist this movement of 
the popular mind by artifice, or by an obstinate adherence 
to a system that is venerable for its age alone, you become 
the teacher of skepticism and infidelity. You virtually ac- 
knowledge that Christianity cannot stand upon its own basis, 
but must be kept from falling by human hands. 

It is the want of the age, the demands of the human in- 
tellect and heart, that Liberal Christianity meets ; and be- 
cause it does so, it is met by hungering souls with a glad 
welcome, and is cheered onwards with a hearty God-speed. 

It is on account of this tendency of the public mind, of 
this spirit of the age, that every thing is to be deprecated 
which can make Christian churches hostile to each other. 
The churches are already looked upon with sufficient sus- 
picion ; and they commit a species of suicide, when they 
belie their Christian profession. Any aff'ectation of superiori- 
ty, any unbecoming pretensions, on the part of any church, 
can only awaken contempt in well-balanced minds ; while 
to those to whom the whole subject of religion is of no 
special moment, it suggests only matter of jesting and mer- 
riment. 

During a ministry of nearly fourteen years, I am confident 
that the terms Unitarian and Orthodox never crossed my lips 
as many times. Knowing that my path was plain before me, 
I have endeavoured to illustrate and enforce " the truth as 
it is in Jesus," with such power as my intellect and heart 
permitted under the circumstances of my ministry. I have 
called no man master ; and I have never regarded any man 
as my personal or sectarian enemy. I have restrained, I 
hope, with a good degree of success, an inborn propensity to 



38 

sarcasm and merriment. I have never assailed in levity or 
ill-humor the weak points in the faith of others. I have 
willingly conceded all that others could ask for, provided it 
involved no compromise of my own faith or personal man- 
hood. And I have only at this time protested — strongly, 
I know, and fairly, I know — against the movement of the 
other church in this town, because I thought serious con- 
siderations required it. Personally, I care nothing for the 
assumptions of others. Personally, it is of as little conse- 
quence to me that Orthodoxy is antagonist to Liberal Chris- 
tianity, as that Papacy itself is. I have made a public pro- 
test, because I thought it due to the church connected with 
this ancient religious society, to the officers and members of 
this church, and to the society at large. 

I have protested against the recent movement, because 
the slightest interference with the reputation or the rights of 
a church only serves to perpetuate that spirit of opposition 
and rancor which disgraces the Christian church and threat- 
ens to work its ruin. It is time that churches ceased their 
quarrels, and tried to introduce a little vital piety into their 
creeds and professions. Until they do this, we may depend 
upon it that people will look for mutual sympathy and aid 
to other "associations," "fellowships," and "fraternities," 
than what should he a brotherhood of Christians. Until they 
do this, we may depend upon it, that, when such a man as 
William Lloyd Garrison stands up in the presence of as- 
sembled and excited thousands, and says, with his own pecu- 
liar eloquence and power, that the Christian church in these 
United States is the bulwark of every vice in the land, and 
of almost every abuse in the world, more and more will be- 
lieve he speaks the truth. 

I should have preferred that those records which I have 
to-day been compelled to drag into light should have re- 
mained hidden and forgotten. I would have treated them 
as the French nation has treated the bones of that multitude 
who were butchered in that era of blood, the French Revo- 
lution, — I would have walled them up for ever from the 



39 

public eye. Let the unwelcome spectacle teach us all a 
salutary lesson. We of this town are an excitable people. 
The inhabitants of Pepperell have always been so. There 
is something in the atmosphere upon our hills that infuses 
a mercurial, a sensitive, principle' into our blood. We are 
great sticklers for equal rights and popular liberty. The 
very name of " Bunker's Hill " stirs our hearts as the sound 
of the trumpet does the war-horse. Being aware of this 
common characteristic of ours, let us beware how we give 
each other occasion for offence. We must remember that 
every encroachment upon each other's rights will be resisted 
to the last of our strength and our life. Let us live together 
peaceably, in that spirit which becometh the followers of 
the Son of God. 



APPENDIX. 



NOTE A. 



Much has been said, in the public journals, in regard to the day of the 
respective centennials in this town. It would betray a want of courtesy to 
show up in this place the many blunders which have been committed. 
The following, from a source which may be relied on, is all we wish to 
say in reference to the matter. " The evidence is positive, that the church 
in Pepperell was organized on the twenty-ninth day of January, 1746-7, 
Old Style. A common century, in New Style, contains 36,524 days. 
Eleven days having been left out of September, 1752, makes the century 

complete on the 9th day of February, 1847, according to New Style 

If the functum temporis for a centennial celebration be sought, computing 
by tropical years, multiply 365 days, 5 hours, 48 minutes, and 48 sec- 
onds by 100, the product is 36,524 days, 5 hours, and 20 minutes. Add 
this to January 29th, 1746-7, at 10 o'clock, A.M., and the amount is 

February 9th, 1847, 3 hours, 20 minutes, P. M The consistent time, 

then, for the first centennial celebration of the founding of the church in 
Pepperell, is February 9th, 1847 ; but if any choose or prefer a different 
day, de gustibus non disputandum est. 



NOTE B. 

In an Appendix to a "Centennial Discourse " delivered in this town, 
January 29th, 1847, the assumption of this exclusive title is excused by the 
author on the ground that he took it as he found it "on the church rec- 
ords." Yes, but what church records? The records of the First Church, 
which were loaned to his predecessor, that he might make a copy of them ; 
and from that copy the name was assumed. 
6 



42 

In the same connection, the author of the " Centennial Discourse " con- 
cedes to the First Church a " legal " existence. That is all that would be 
demanded at his hand ; but if it has an existence, it must have a name. It 
would call itself a church of Christ ; certainly it would not, being a Prot- 
estant church, assume, like the Roman Catholic Church, to be The Church 
of Christ. That would be Protestant Papacy, indeed. 

The author of the " Centennial Discourse " indulges in some severe 
strictures upon Chief Justice Parker and the Supreme Court of Massachu- 
setts, in reference to the celebrated " Dedham Case." The ground of 
complaint seems to be, that the court did not see fit to make the State sub- 
servient to the Church. A hard case, truly. We would feel very indig- 
nant, if we could. "A lawyer, reviewing this case in 1829, says" — 
what doubtless he is ashamed of in 1847. We are very suspicious that 
when this " lawyer " talks about the churches as " speckled birds," he is 
only making game of them. 



NOTE C. 

Note H, in the Appendix to the " Centennial Discourse," is in refer- 
ence to " charging Mr. Howe with breaking a solemn promise made before 
his ordaining council, that he would exchange with clergymen of ' liberal 
sentiments.' " The Note goes on to say, — " As this charge has recently 
been reiterated in public, the publishing committee have requested the in- 
sertion of the following testimony, to refute [!] the above calumny." 
Calumny! Does the writer of the Note mean to say, that to recite the 
charge is to perpetrate a calumny ? But let us see what the evidence is 
that is to refute the charge. The Note goes on, —" The Rev. Messrs. 
Fisher and Farnsworth, of Harvard and Boxborough, who were both on 
that council, say, that when something was said in the council on the sub- 
ject of exchanges, — a minority of the people opposing his settlement be- 
cause he was not liberal enough, — Mr. H. signified his willingness to 
exchange with the clergy of the ordaining council." Well, that is all that 
was ever asked for. So it seems, even upon the testimony of Messrs. 
Fisher and Farnsworth, that the promise was given. But stop ; we have 
not the whole, — " so far as he kneio them." Very well ; he knew that the)^ 
were Trinitarian and Unitarian ministers, of each a nearly equal number, 
— that they were every one of them men of the first rank and respecta- 
bility ; }ie knew why they had been summoned as a council ; he knew what 
was implied and expected in his promise. The Note goes on, — "but, 
being a stranger in this vicinity, he declined committing himself." Now 
how does the case stand? Mr. Howe, knowing all the circumstances of the 
case, knowing why a mixed council had been summoned, why a certain 



43 

promise was demanded, — in fact, knowing all about it, — is represented by 
his clerical friends as having made a promise which misled the promisees, 
and left him an outlet by which to escape from the fulfilment of that promise ! 
Could the voice of the dead be heard, it would be to exclaim, " Save me 
from my friends ! " One monument has been erected to his memory in the 
graveyard at Pepperell, over which, no doubt, affection has shed many 
tears. And now his clerical brethren have tried to erect another, with 
types and ink, to his deep disgrace. 

The next witness is the Rev. Mr. Bennett, of Woburn. He recollects 
nothing about the matter. Of course his testimony is unimportant. The 
Rev. Humphrey Moore says as follows : — ''■It is my opinion, based on 
what recollection I have, that he [Mr. Howe] expressed willingness to exchange 
ivith ministers in that region, whose characters were good, and who were in 
regular standing,''^ Very well, there we have it again; the promise was 
made, a promise wider and more liberal than we ever supposed was asked 
for. It is proved by Mr. Moore himself. But the witness goes on, — 
" By this I did not understand that he promised to exchange loilh Unitarians.'''' 
No matter what Mr. Moore " understands " ; we want the facts, and we 
can probably understand them as well as he. As this witness is somewhat 
notorious in these parts for his loit, perhaps this wholesale excommuni- 
cation of Unitarians is only a specimen of that gift. The Note ends thus : 
— " The testimony of four credible witnesses must be true, and therefore 
this illiberal complaint is seen to be groundless." Indeed! who sees it? 
Of those " four " witnesses, one testifies nothing at all ; and the other three 
all testify that the promise was made. Their own constructions of the 
promise are entirely gratuitous, and nothing to the point. 

This testimony of four ministers was designed to meet and rebut the 
testimony of the Rev. Drs. Ripley and Thayer, and the Rev. Messrs. Da- 
mon and Bascom, — men who died full of years and of honors. The 
reader is referred to this Address for their plain, precise, and circumstantial 
statement of facts, as they occurred in the ordaining council. 



NOTE D. 

Note J of the "Centennial Discourse" says, that " Lutlicr's great 
doctrine of the Reformation" was "acknowledging him [Christ] as our 
alone Saviour." Indeed, that is a new discovery ! We had supposed 
that the whole Christian church from the beginning had embraced that 
doctrine. The Note goes on, — "Accordingly, we disclaim our own 
righteousness in point of justification, cleaving to him for righteousness, 
grace, life, and glory." And then the writer adds, — " If this is not dis- 



44 

tinctive Orthodoxy, what is? " Really, this last is di hard question; and 
when Professors Stuart, Taylor, Tyler, and the Auburn and Princeton 
Professors shall have settled it, their decision shall be announced, with 
becoming solemnity, from the pulpit of the First Parish in Pepperell. But 
it is a great mistake to suppose that to disclaim one's own righteousness 
is peculiar to Orthodoxy ; it is common to every Christian denomination of 
which we have any knowledge. It is to God's free mercy and grace that 
we must look for pardon and acceptance, and not to our own righteousness. 
To say that this was Martin Luther's "great doctrine of the Reformation " 
is an unscholarlike mistake ; for it was the abuse of this doctrine by the 
Roman Catholic priesthood, that gave the first start to the reformatory 
movement. The Catholics said that the merits of Christ constituted a 
fund for the Church. Upon the basis of that fund, they began to sell in- 
dulgences. Tetzel brought the infamous merchandise into Luther's neigh- 
bourhood, and the sturdy Reformer began his war upon Popery itself. 
Perhaps it will not be impertinent to say, that the doctrine of the Reforma- 
tion was, " the Bible is the only sufficient rule of faith and duty." This 
struck at the root of Papacy, inasmuch as it denied the supreme authority 
and infallibility of the Pope. 



NOTE E. 

Note K of the " Centennial Discourse " says that the church in Pepperell 
was formed from the Union Church in Groton ; and that therefore this lat- 
ter church was present by invitation at the "Centennial," on the 29th of 
January. The Union Church in Groton was formed November 21, 1826. 
It remains an unsettled question, how this blooming mother of twenty- 
one years can have a venerable daughter a hundred years of age. 




'^h0MkM^''^''-^'^' 




''^Mlfllfel^' 







mmmi 



